4 ms·

You are off by a few orders of magnitude. Total fuel load is 70,000kg and a 747-400 carries 416 passengers in a typical 3-class configuration[0]. That comes to

by fr0sty 8y ago

You are off by a few orders of magnitude. Total fuel load is 70,000kg and a 747-400 carries 416 passengers in a typical 3-class configuration[0]. That comes to only 168kg/passenger. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_747 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_747

justinator 8y ago
I was basically paraphrasing this: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/sunday-review/the-biggest-carbon-sin-air-travel.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/sunday-review/the-biggest... "For many people reading this, air travel is their most serious environmental sin. One round-trip flight from New York to Europe or to San Francisco creates a warming effect equivalent to 2 or 3 tons of carbon dioxide per person. The average American generates about 19 tons of carbon dioxide a year; the average European, 10." Seems like there's some tricky math going on, notice: "equivalent" in the above quote: http://www.carbonindependent.org/sources_aviation.html http://www.carbonindependent.org/sources_aviation.html This calculates 180 kg CO2/hour per passenger. So 8 hours or so between NYC and Paris? 1,440 kg. 1.6 tons. Not quite a few orders of magnitude. Once through all the calculations, the above then states, "The CO2 emissions are therefore rounded up and the Carbon Independent calculator takes a values of 250 kg i.e. ¼ tonne CO2 equivalent per hour flying." So that's more like 4 tons to Paris. (on Basis 1)
- fr0sty 8y ago
  No idea what they mean by "Equivalent" either, I was just doing the math with the figures quotes up-thread. Look at the correction at the bottom of the NYT piece: > "A news analysis article last Sunday about the impact of air travel on global warming referred imprecisely to the environmental impact of one round-trip flight from New York to Europe or to San Francisco. It has a warming effect equivalent to 2 or 3 tons of carbon dioxide per person, but does not generate that much carbon dioxide per person. (The estimate also includes warming from other greenhouses gases.)" So actual carbon output per person was correctly calculated, but there is some "carbon equivalent" multiplier slapped on other gasses that brings their totals up from 170kg/px to 2-3T/px.

by fr0sty 8y ago

justinator 8y ago

I was basically paraphrasing this: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/sunday-review/the-biggest-carbon-sin-air-travel.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/sunday-review/the-biggest... "For many people reading this, air travel is their most serious environmental sin. One round-trip flight from New York to Europe or to San Francisco creates a warming effect equivalent to 2 or 3 tons of carbon dioxide per person. The average American generates about 19 tons of carbon dioxide a year; the average European, 10." Seems like there's some tricky math going on, notice: "equivalent" in the above quote: http://www.carbonindependent.org/sources_aviation.html http://www.carbonindependent.org/sources_aviation.html This calculates 180 kg CO2/hour per passenger. So 8 hours or so between NYC and Paris? 1,440 kg. 1.6 tons. Not quite a few orders of magnitude. Once through all the calculations, the above then states, "The CO2 emissions are therefore rounded up and the Carbon Independent calculator takes a values of 250 kg i.e. ¼ tonne CO2 equivalent per hour flying." So that's more like 4 tons to Paris. (on Basis 1)

fr0sty 8y ago
No idea what they mean by "Equivalent" either, I was just doing the math with the figures quotes up-thread. Look at the correction at the bottom of the NYT piece: > "A news analysis article last Sunday about the impact of air travel on global warming referred imprecisely to the environmental impact of one round-trip flight from New York to Europe or to San Francisco. It has a warming effect equivalent to 2 or 3 tons of carbon dioxide per person, but does not generate that much carbon dioxide per person. (The estimate also includes warming from other greenhouses gases.)" So actual carbon output per person was correctly calculated, but there is some "carbon equivalent" multiplier slapped on other gasses that brings their totals up from 170kg/px to 2-3T/px.